Would you quit Legacy if Brainstorm was banned?

[HSCK]

Eh. Like I have said multiple times, I don't actually care whether or not they do ban brainstorm. But the numbers and everything points towards it being banned. Yes it is powerful, yes it is pretty fun to cast, but so is survival and that got the axe. Sure survival enabled being attacked on T2 by a couple of 4/3's every once in awhile (as if we dont just get derped by emrakul half the time now anyway), but it didn't seem that broken imo. BS is more played than that was and people enjoy it.

To anyone saying they would quit because their decks would be invalidated, please shut the fuck up and be creative. Your stupid Shardless BUG deck or whatever isn't dead just because of BS being banned. Regardless of what Gerry T or Todd Anderson say. Instead of bitching and whining about a very powerful card being banned that really isn't even a build around card, you could try other options. Banning SNT would kill SnT decks. Banning Survival killed Survival decks. Banning brainstorm would not kill off any deck.

I like how you tell players not to bitch and complain....while bitching and complaining about BStorm and TNN in every single post.

[jam3sbob]

I would not quit, I like playing Magic not playing Brainstorm. I like Brainstorm, I like Magic more.

[Megadeus]

I like how you tell players not to bitch and complain....while bitching and complaining about BStorm and TNN in every single post.

Remind me where I bitched about BS? I said it is strong yes. And like the numbers say, it SHOULD be in consideration for banning. As for TNN, sure I bitch about it, but at least I am not threatening to quit the format because of it like some people in here.

[Patrunkenphat7]

I like Magic. I like Brainstorm more.

[Dzra]

These debates are rather tiresome. Would it cause people to quit Legacy? Maybe some, but not all. Would it inspire less players into trying out Legacy for the first time? Given Brainstorm's widely touted "fun rating," this seems like a more reasonable prediction.

The fact of the matter is that however much the anti-Brainstorm crowd tries to sell the idea that banning Brainstorm will promote format diversity, this is simply not likely to be the case. As many have said before, color diversity is not the same thing as format/strategic diversity. Many decks can exist in Legacy only because of the unique ability to shuffle away dead cards that Brainstorm gives. Without Brainstorm, we would see more linear decks and less decks overall.

Yes, perhaps the ratio of non-Blue to Blue decks would even itself out, but not so much because more non-Blue decks suddenly become viable but because less Blue decks are viable. Most people are happy with a very diverse format that just happens to be a very Blue format. Could WotC try a little harder to balance the color pie? Sure, but banning Brainstorm isn't the way to do it.

[Barook]

Yes, perhaps the ratio of non-Blue to Blue decks would even itself out, but not so much because more non-Blue decks suddenly become viable but because less Blue decks are viable. Most people are happy with a very diverse format that just happens to be a very Blue format. Could WotC try a little harder to balance the color pie? Sure, but banning Brainstorm isn't the way to do it.

Maybe the format becomes more or less diverse, we don't have data on that, but that isn't the main issue here.

The message the GP results show right now is "Play blue or go home!" - just like "Play deck X or go home!", this isn't the sign of a healthy format. Something has to go or the format becomes even more loop-sided. And an exaggerated demand for blue duals leads to massive prices increases for said cards that will damage the format as a whole.

Want to keep Brainstorm around? Sure, but then prepare to get all the other broken blue crap Wizards puts out recently banned to keep some balance. Banning TNN is only the necessary beginning.

[ahg113]

Most people are happy with a very diverse format that just happens to be a very Blue format.

I agree with most of what you say except for the quoted. There is much gnashing of teeth, wrenching of hands and clenching of taints because "most" is too obscure in either a means of keeping or banning brainstorm (what could be construed as the very Blue format), hence the repetitive conversation.

Would it be better for MtG to design a balanced color pie? Absolutely.
Has MtG R&D given any indication they could do that? Nope.
Is banning a usable tool, even if of last resort? Yup.

As of 11:34 PM 2/17/2014 - the No's (anti-Blue format) have it, with a bare margin of 70 to a combined 66 (Yes quit + Think about it). Granted, that pole isn't worth much (I am not a scientist, is it scientific?), but as the people have spoken here...

[apple713]

the only issue with brainstorm is that it gives players a perfect opportunity to cheat.


8:47:00 Javier Dominguez Brainstorms with 1 card in hand. Puts only one card back and has three cards in hand. Mind blown how no one caught this.

http://www.twitch.tv/magic/b/503812813



unfortunately there are many players like the both of these guys. Not sure why the hell they were so concerned with what was in each other graveyard or why mr castillo flipped his graveyard over right next to his library. maybe he was trying to stack his graveyard and get "confused"


and then this happens.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bgt1XUCCEAA8bUt.png

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I would be pretty amused if the ease of cheating with it was the impetuous they needed to actually finally ban the damn card.

[Dzra]

I agree with most of what you say except for the quoted. There is much gnashing of teeth, wrenching of hands and clenching of taints because "most" is too obscure in either a means of keeping or banning brainstorm (what could be construed as the very Blue format), hence the repetitive conversation.

I don't think it's that a ton of people are wishing Brainstorm would be banned. I think the reason this argument keeps popping up is because there is a very vocal minority of forum crawlers that dislike the format's Blue bias. The vast majority of Legacy players don't read blogs, don't regularly post on forums (especially outside of their particular deck's thread), and it would never even occur to many of these players that Brainstorm would be considered by some to be a ban candidate. Whether they've ever given it much consideration or not, the silent majority of Legacy players is enjoying this strategically diverse and Blue-heavy format and by extension are enjoying Brainstorm.

Would it be better for MtG to design a balanced color pie? Absolutely.

I think most people would agree with this, whether for or against banning Brainstorm.

Has MtG R&D given any indication they could do that? Nope.

I think they've shown initiative to introduce anti-cantrip cards such as Thalia, Spirit of the Labyrinth, and Notion Thief. It has been hit and miss so far, but you can't say they aren't trying.

As of 11:34 PM 2/17/2014 - the No's (anti-Blue format) have it, with a bare margin of 70 to a combined 66 (Yes quit + Think about it). Granted, that pole isn't worth much (I am not a scientist, is it scientific?), but as the people have spoken here...

This poll isn't "Do you want to see Brainstorm banned?" It is "Would you rage-quit the format if Brainstorm were banned?" I would expect a large swing in the other direction if the poll were phrased differently.

8:47:00 Javier Dominguez Brainstorms with 1 card in hand. Puts only one card back and has three cards in hand. Mind blown how no one caught this.

If you notice during the video, unfortunately most of the judges are off to the side talking while this occurred (presumably because of the prior ruling that just happened). I don't think it's possible to prove that he was actually cheating, but either way, I don't think such sloppy play should go unpunished.

[apple713]

If you notice during the video, unfortunately most of the judges are off to the side talking while this occurred (presumably because of the prior ruling that just happened). I don't think it's possible to prove that he was actually cheating, but either way, I don't think such sloppy play should go unpunished.

its obvious he is cheating. his hand plays out perfectly and uses every card he keeps. Never in my 16 years of playing have I even been confused about what brainstorm says and mistakenly just not put back the correct amount of cards.

i really hope his title is stripped from him.


EDIT, just found this on another thread

I'm rooting for Javier. I played him in round 4 (where I got my first loss). He was really nice and a very good player. I liked how precise he was in his play, announcing each trigger, explaining exactly what he was doing with Sylvan Library, and so on.

He plays a Team America version which he tuned for the mirror match, replacing 2 Tombstalker with 2 Dark Confidant, and playing 3 FoW / 3 Liliana MD. I misread him, thinking he was playing Drew Levin's "Blue Jund", and got surprised when he started playing Delvers.

apparently he is a really sharp player. Seems unlike him to misplay brainstorm

[Dzra]

Never in my 16 years of playing have I even been confused about what brainstorm says and mistakenly just not put back the correct amount of cards.

While I agree with you there, I also can't imagine why he'd want to cheat when he knows he's on camera and is sitting at 17 facing only an unflipped Delver with a Delver of his own. Is it really worth risking a game loss or disqualification to cast Diabolic Edict one turn sooner? Then again, who knows what a cheater is thinking at any point? Either way, I'd like to see some action done.

[apple713]

While I agree with you there, I also can't imagine why he'd want to cheat when he knows he's on camera and is sitting at 17 facing only an unflipped Delver with a Delver of his own. Is it really worth risking a game loss or disqualification to cast Diabolic Edict one turn sooner? Then again, who knows what a cheater is thinking at any point? Either way, I'd like to see some action done.

thats and interesting perspective. While there is no need to in that moment maybe cheating is a habitual thing like stealing. Maybe there is just a thrill of getting away with it. I don't know.

[sdematt]

thats and interesting perspective. While there is no need to in that moment maybe cheating is a habitual thing like stealing. Maybe there is just a thrill of getting away with it. I don't know.

He WOULD be putting a second card back on top is the exact moment when the opponent is looking away. Likely the opponent didn't catch it because he was...just not looking. But, I don't see his eyes glancing up to check to see if he's looking, so for me, it's possible that it was an honest mistake or he's just REALLY bold.

We'll see what happens, but after looking at the footage, only one card went back. /Obviously.

-Matt

[Purgatory]

and then this happens.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bgt1XUCCEAA8bUt.png

And the last sentence in the info text on the first page of coverage:

"Until next time, we say good bye and ... Congratulations to Javier Dominguez, champion of Grand Prix Vienna 2013!"


What?

[death]

Playing in a format where Brainstorm exists (control/midrange/tempo-oriented meta), i think, is the best thing. Games have become more challenging, than say a decade or two ago. If Brainstorm is banned, I predict the meta will shift to combo (and aggro) decks goldfishing by turn 4. Control/tempo-ish strategies would suck and legacy will be anything but interesting or interactive. It'll be a glass cannon shootout format, storm in particular and gy-based strategies.

Let's not assume that combo will be weakened because of discard effects without Brainstorm, because combo can play white Leyline and remain virtually untouched by discard, and, them too can play discard, which gives them the upper hand against control decks that have no way of digging (or hiding) permission, and library- or mana-fixing in a pinch.

[thefreakaccident]

And the last sentence in the info text on the first page of coverage:

"Until next time, we say good bye and ... Congratulations to Javier Dominguez, champion of Grand Prix Vienna 2013!"


What?

Javier Dom. is exactly the type of player the world economy tries to inspire. Look into your opponent's eyes confidently while you cheat them. I know I would if I cared to win enough. Remember, the cheater who doesn't get caught has a better chance of winning than those poor honest shmucks!

That's the problem with 'pro' magic, people will use any means, dishonest or otherwise, to win. If the game was less expensive to buy in, it would simply be more about the plays and showmanship, and people wouldn't pull this shit.

It is slightly understandable from spectators when someone cheats for money, much less when it is simply for their pride. That's the difference from simply being disreputable, to people not even wanting to look at you from embarrassment.

This is also why I feel sports shouldn't pay hardly anything, and those who waste their lives playing them competitively should do it not for the money, but just the recognition. I bet there would be less of them juicing it up too.


In regards to the OP, I full heartedly agree with Zilla's assessment.

[Hof]

the only issue with brainstorm is that it gives players a perfect opportunity to cheat.

Banning cards for giving "players opportunity to cheat" is absurd.

Brainstorm and similar spells or abilities that draw multiple cards always require extra attention from both players, because both players are fully responsible for keeping a legal game state.

When your opponent asks for the first time if Brainstorm resolves, notice (or ask) how many cards are in his hand. Then after Brainstorm has finished resolving, you can check the number again. During the resolution, if you are not able to see clearly how many cards your opponent draws or puts back, ask him or her to show the cards more clearly. Not because you think he or she is cheating, but because you are responsible for the legal game state, and you can't do that if you can't see clearly how many cards are drawn (or put back on top).

When you resolve Brainstorm, please make an effort to let your opponent and everyone else who might be watching see clearly what is going on. For example, draw the three cards face down on the table. Then put them in hand one at a time. Then put two cards from your hand back on the table face down. Then put them on top of library one at a time. This whole maneuver takes 10 seconds.

[Zombie]

I think most people would agree with this[a balanced color pie], whether for or against banning Brainstorm.

I think they've shown initiative to introduce anti-cantrip cards such as Thalia, Spirit of the Labyrinth, and Notion Thief. It has been hit and miss so far, but you can't say they aren't trying.

Sadly, hate cards are not how you do it, actually workable card selection in other colors is how you do it. More GSZ's, red looting where the discard is part of the effect, not the cost so you can use it to grab a card to an empty hand. In that vein seeing Survival gone was sad because it was another great nonblue card selection spell, and required a heavy green commitment. But given the horrors WotC prints nowadays...

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Repeating on a theme I hit on a couple of years ago, let's examine the performance of individual cards within the top 16 of large events for which we have data. For this I am using SCG opens since TNN became legal at the beginning of November, and the two Legacy GPs since (with the GPs counting double to reflect larger size.) I would have included the BoM data if it were available but their site sucks.

(If you want the tl;dr skip to the last chart)

Consistent with the data from last time, Brainstorm and Force continue to be both ubiquitous and highly performing at every level of the tournament data. It might be easy to gloss over but the combination bears dwelling on; usually the more popular a strategy is, the more you would expect diminishing returns as people prepare counters to that strategy. This is in fact a large part of what drives the change in the metagame, as many decks come and go (the data bears witness to the dramatic death of Maverick and Death and Taxes as relevant contenders, for instance.)

It won't let me post the excel sheet because this forum sucks but here's a snapshot of the raw data:



Here's how it breaks down in graph form, showing step by step advancement of each card from top 16 to wins:















Note: I included Karakas in colorless, because, land, and it could be run in any color deck; but it is probably has a 1:1 correlation with white decks and should be included as a white card. Well, I'm not fixing the data now, it's almost 7 am. Modify your perceptions of the colorless/white balance as it suits you.



And finally, averaging together the performance of all measured cards without weighting for field presence (so Brainstorm and Stifle affect performance equally):



Some take aways from the data:

- Red is the least played but best performing secondary color, although for reasons already mentioned with more of a red presence this might change as you get diminishing returns.

- TNN has probably had an extensive impact on the meta, but is not actually the primary beneficiary of this change, being an underperformer compared to most blue cards. Goyf has certainly suffered for its presence, and green as a whole.

- Wasteland continues to be probably drastically overplayed, the hype over Deathrite isn't really justified, Clique is actually a better performing three drop than TNN probably reflecting combo's presence, and Loam and P-Fire should see more play.

- Once-greats or at least promising cards that showed up too little to compile reliable data include Elspeth, KotR, Faithless Looting, Young Pyromance, B-Wish, pretty obviously Geist, Goblin Lackey.

And ultimately:

It shouldn't be surprising, because the data just confirms what most people should already know: Blue is dominant as a presence in the format, and still underplayed relative to its performance. What this means is that the primary reason blue isn't more played is probably just people refusing to play blue.

No particular engine or kill condition can be reasonably blamed for blue's dominance, although Delver seems like its most efficient kill condition. Blue simply has an arsenal of very efficient cards in every role at the moment. But at the core of these decks is the combination of Brainstorm and Force of Will, and very few people would suggest that Force of Will is a problem in the format.

There is no reason to believe that blue's ongoing and ever-increasing dominance over the format would be significantly checked by the banning of any single other card rather than Brainstorm, so if you think a format where the metagame is entirely blue-based into perpetuity is bad, you should be advocating either a banning of Brainstorm or a comprehensive banning of a number of problematic blue cards, probably something like Delver, TNN, SnT at a minimum.